tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post4669381889792701854..comments2019-09-10T07:48:49.462+02:00Comments on Kotzk Blog: 232) THEOLOGICAL POLITICS SURROUNDING THE EMERGENCE OF THE SHULCHAN ARUCH:Rabbi Gavin Michalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14410541880380752479noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-38364257776256664122019-07-29T20:54:21.470+02:002019-07-29T20:54:21.470+02:00Ok, but the Satmar example, even though it has a h...Ok, but the Satmar example, even though it has a huge number is still not analogous to the claim of my sources which imply &#39;all the House of Israel&#39; (which is what I refer to by &#39;critical mass&#39;).<br /><br />But, yes, nice to interact with you.Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-85634155699876849522019-07-29T14:16:23.234+02:002019-07-29T14:16:23.234+02:00B&quot;H
Ok, at least we have managed to come to ...B&quot;H<br /><br />Ok, at least we have managed to come to some sort of understanding.<br />Originally you asked how the the SA superseded the MT? The question was clearly predicated on the fact that MT was universally accepted.<br />Therefore we had to come up with the idea (Which is מופרך מעיקרו), that it was the minuscule amount of Kabalah, which was גובר on the MT.<br /><br />However the core preconception is no different then the following question: since a hundred thousand Chassidim accept the opinion of the Satmar Rebbe in regards to Zionism, how did it later come about that most Jews disregarded his opinion? The answer is of course, that while a critical mass of a hundred thousand Chassidim is something substantial and can even create מחלוקת, it still has no bearing for all those that either don&#39;t accept the SR outright, or accept him in some issues but not in others, and his view was not accepted in a unequivocal fashion.<br /><br />Just to conclude, since you quoted the Rashba, I would like to point out that while he quotes the Rambam all the time with great reverence, he does however disagree with him all the time.nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-63823422807636508252019-07-29T09:00:21.474+02:002019-07-29T09:00:21.474+02:00Thank you for that contribution.
Again, the disc...Thank you for that contribution. <br /><br />Again, the discussion was never whether Rambam was the unequivocal Posek Acharon, but rather whether or not he was supported by a critical mass at some point before the other codes were introduced. From many of these sources, it appears quite likely that that may have been the case.<br />Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-1350324677723762512019-07-29T05:13:13.298+02:002019-07-29T05:13:13.298+02:00B&quot;H
A few points have to be made.
1. No whe...B&quot;H<br /><br />A few points have to be made. <br />1. No where did I say that he did not have a great following. As a matter of fact, there would have been no great controversy about him, had he not had a great following. The question is if he became the unequivocal Posek Acharon, accepted by all.<br />2. This is all about philosophy, not Halachah. Not that it matters so much, because the Rambam had a great following in Halachik matters, but rather this has to be pointed out if you are bringing certain points as proof.<br />3. In addition the story about R. Yonah is a slanderous lie as is known to students of history.<br /><br />To elaborate:<br /><br />The letter you quote is by Radak to Rabbi Yehudah Alfacar of Toledo (Kovets Teshuvos Harambam, Igros Kenaos 4c). The Radak accused Rabbi Shlomo of Montpellier (not his student Rabeinu Yonah) of personally approaching the Christian priests with the request to burn the Moreh. However, as explained at length in Tsion, vol. 36, p. 45–52 the most reliable source we possess today about this event is the letter of Chachmei Lunil printed in Tsion, vol. 34, p. 140–143. In this letter, the unnamed informers are described as a group of Montpellier Jews opposed to the Rambam. The chachmei Lunil lived in proximity to the center of events and certainly had no motive to cover up for Rabbi Shlomo, who they attacked bitterly in their letter. Had they suspected him of direct involvement they surely would have emphasized this point. The letter also describes the punishment later meted out to the informers, the cutting of their tongues. It is clear that neither Rabbi Shlomo nor his students Rabeinu Yonah and Rabbi David suffered such a punishment.<br /><br />It seems that we are conflating this false accusation with the separate, and equally untrue, report of Rabbi Hillel Hachasid (Igros Kenaos 13–15), a talmid of Rabeinu Yonah, that relates the burning of the Talmud in Paris in 1244 to the burning of the Moreh Nevuchim. According to Rabbi Hillel’s version of events, the Moreh Nevuchim was burned in Paris, and forty days later the Talmud was burned in the same place. Rabbi Hillel says that the source of his account is “public knowledge.” Historians have completely discounted the historicity of this account. nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-62566659756637946782019-07-28T19:37:37.936+02:002019-07-28T19:37:37.936+02:00Here are two even earlier sources which seem to im...Here are two even earlier sources which seem to imply that Rambam was accepted and followed by a critical mass:<br /><br />1)Rashba issued a ban against studying Rambam&#39;s philosophical writings (until the age of 25). He wrote:<br /><br /> “The [Jewish] people are split in two [as a result of the Maimonidean rationalists].” [Minchat Kena’ot p. 730]<br /><br />&quot;SPLIT in two&quot; seems to imply a significant mass if not a critical one.<br /><br />2) Rashba&#39;s teacher, R. Yona Gerondi, when dealing with the same Maimonidean threat, went to the Christians – first the Franciscans and then the Dominicans - pleading:<br /><br />“Look, most of our people are heretics and unbelievers, because they were duped by R. Moses of Egypt [Maimonides] who wrote heretical books. <br /><br />You exterminate heretics, exterminate ours too.”[Iggerot Kena’ot III, 4c. (Leipzig 1859)]<br /><br />&quot;MOST of our people are heretics (for being duped by Rambam)&quot;, also seems to imply a critical mass of Maimonidean followers.Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-88441177893054640072019-07-15T08:47:23.899+02:002019-07-15T08:47:23.899+02:00Its an honor to interact with someone who really l...Its an honor to interact with someone who really learns but this is not a debate about how much one knows, its about understanding a basic principle of how texts become authoritative and binding - and that&#39;s by being accepted by a critical mass. Usually Mishneh Torah is not associated with being being accepted by that critical mass. This article is based on sources that do hold that that critical mass existed. That&#39;s all. That its an unusual view, I accept, but outside of the bubble there are are unusual views. This is normal for any investigation and does not warrant hysterical reactions.Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-73652784576257973462019-07-15T04:10:59.458+02:002019-07-15T04:10:59.458+02:00B&quot;H.
I don&#39;t think you understood me. I ...B&quot;H.<br /><br />I don&#39;t think you understood me. I would think one who studies the Meiri would understand. The Meiri brings in every Sugya the different opinions of different opinions of different Rishonim Rishonim. This includes the Rambam of course, but the Rambam is just one opinion among many others, and is many times not accepted. <br /><br />As a matter of fact the Meiri calls Rashi Gedolei Ha&#39;rabannim, the Ri&quot;f Gedolei Ha&#39;Poskim and on the Rambam he writes Gedolei Ha&#39;Mechabrim.<br /><br />I think any person who knows a bit of history from that era can tell you, that the Meiri&#39;s evaluation was one of the best you would get as to how the contemporary Poskim viewed the matter at the time.<br /><br />&quot;Whether there ever was a point where Mishneh Torah was in that position is debatable. &quot;<br /><br />SOrry it is not debatable. I don&#39;t think you grasp the overwhelming evidence known to every historian and what I have laid out, clearly points to the fact that he was not accepted as the de facto Posek.<br /><br /><br />&quot;Until the unlikely event that we shall ever see the &#39;census or voting results&#39; after each Code was produced, we look to chroniclers not sugyas.&quot;<br /><br />According to this idea, one cannot learn history from Teshuvos for that matter. Which is of course not true.<br /><br />In any event the statement is not true. Because the best Chronicle is the posek on a Sugya who did not accept the Rambam, which shows you how he was viewed.<br /><br />With all due respect, the underlying issue here and in many articles is, where we read something in some book, without evaluating the matter independently based on out own level of understanding. If we would have evaluated this independently based not on what we were taught, but rather what we see in plain sight (for one who actually learns), then we would see in five seconds flat that these theories don&#39;t hold an ounce of water.<br /><br /><br /><br />nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-40313545802930607652019-07-14T21:41:23.818+02:002019-07-14T21:41:23.818+02:00Thank you for your kind suggestion but how will go...Thank you for your kind suggestion but how will going from sugya to sugya, say, in the Yerushalmi change the fact that the Bavli was accepted by all of Israel? <br /><br />Either it was or it wasn&#39;t. For that you need a chronicler to show that the majority of Jews accepted one work as preeminent over the other.<br /><br />Whether there ever was a point where Mishneh Torah was in that position is debatable. The same, by the way, may be said of the other Codes. <br /><br />Until the unlikely event that we shall ever see the &#39;census or voting results&#39; after each Code was produced, we look to chroniclers not sugyas.Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-25109331906649189272019-07-14T19:47:22.646+02:002019-07-14T19:47:22.646+02:00B&quot;H.
I want to reiterate a certain point. I ...B&quot;H.<br /><br />I want to reiterate a certain point. I am not basing my position, based on what I was taught.<br />I am rather basing my position on clear empirical evidence, as it is eminently clear to anyone who studies what the Rishonim actually write.<br />I am not reverting to authority or testimonies of chronicler, I am simply stating a simple fact that is borne out in the writings of the Rishonim. The Rambam was highly respected, but was not the final say at all. <br />Another source I recommend you make usage of, is to go through Sugya after Sugya with a meiri.nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-8500678055837588872019-07-14T10:51:17.905+02:002019-07-14T10:51:17.905+02:00You&#39;re absolutely correct. My premise is based...You&#39;re absolutely correct. My premise is based on on Zacto and Kapach. (The former lived closer to Rambam than any other historic chronicler I am aware of). According to them there was widespread acceptance of the Mishneh Torah &#39;throughout all of Israel&#39;. <br />The fact that that goes against the way most of us (myself included) were taught, is what makes this position so interesting to me.Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-56104066806906268732019-07-14T05:05:23.791+02:002019-07-14T05:05:23.791+02:00B&quot;H
With all due respect, the entire premise...B&quot;H<br /><br />With all due respect, the entire premise seems to be borne out of the fact, that you quote 2 authorities (one of whom lived 800 years later), and you ignore empirical evidence to be found as basic, by any person who actually sits and reads this stuff, and does not just know what he saw in a book or two.nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-46435258651416605932019-07-14T05:03:37.404+02:002019-07-14T05:03:37.404+02:00B&quot;H
&quot;In the Kapach edition of Mishneh T...B&quot;H<br /><br />&quot;In the Kapach edition of Mishneh Torah, considered to be the most accurate.&quot;<br /><br />His edition may be the most accurate in the terms of what is considered proper text, not in regards to his analysis. I think the language of the Ra&#39;aved is quite clear.<br /><br />In any event the wide gamut of Rishonim that argue or who don&#39;t Pasken according to the Rambam should put this wild notion to rest.<br /><br />Forget about Ashkenazic Rishonim, think about the Ramban, Rashba, Ritva, Ra&quot;n and Nimukei Yosef, all of whom argue with the Rambam, and the list goes on and on (all of whom lived in Spain.nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-57539343377399652332019-07-13T21:20:54.340+02:002019-07-13T21:20:54.340+02:00In the Kapach edition of Mishneh Torah, considered...In the Kapach edition of Mishneh Torah, considered to be the most accurate, R. Yosef Kapach says every time Raavad appears to argue with Rambam, his intention was simply to show how there are different ways to learn out the Halacha:<br /><br />“It seems to me that we should not assume that Rabad agreed where he was silent or that he disagreed where he commented, but rather that he was disclosing to the reader the existence of another opinion.<br /><br />What Rabad wrote should not be considered his view or decision, except in the case of his responsa which are applied halacha, and in his hidushim on the Talmud, but not his hassagot in opposition to Maimonides...”<br />Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-29049050018486447382019-07-12T19:29:46.059+02:002019-07-12T19:29:46.059+02:00B&quot;H.
1. It does not help to quote individual...B&quot;H.<br /><br />1. It does not help to quote individual testimonies from one or 2 people. Open up a Frenkel Rambam and check Halachah after Halachah, and you will see how the Rishonim consistently argued with the Rambam. You don&#39;t even need to go that far, just see the fact that there are Hasagos Ha&#39;Raaved printed on the side. See the Noseh Keilim (Kesef Mishnah, Maggid Mishna ETC), and you will see how often Rishonim argued with the Rambam. While one will find individual disagreements in regards to the SA, it pails in comparison to the MT.<br /><br />2. I guess you accept my basic point, that most of the full gamut of Halochos where the SA argues with the Rambam has nothing to do with mysticism, debunking Drazin&#39;s ridiculous theory. nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-40512340980741483122019-07-12T09:16:19.760+02:002019-07-12T09:16:19.760+02:00Thank you Nochum Shmaryohu Zajac for your comment....Thank you Nochum Shmaryohu Zajac for your comment.<br />As mentioned, R. Avraham Zacuto, one of the first Jewish historians who wrote his Sefer Yuchasin which dealt with Jewish history up to the year 1500, is an early a source. He writes that the Mishneh Torah (despite clearly being controversial in some circles) was nevertheless &#39;accepted by all of Israel&#39;. <br />Additionally we have R. Kapach&#39;s testimony that Mishneh Torah was accepted in large centers (not just in Yemen) like Toledo, Castile and Tunis.Kotzk Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249905502266813412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5576585332526677688.post-15701084928139490462019-07-11T22:29:43.182+02:002019-07-11T22:29:43.182+02:00This is a strange post for 2 reasons.
1. Any hist...This is a strange post for 2 reasons.<br /><br />1. Any historian can tell you that there was tremendous controversy in regards to the acceptance of the Mishne Torah. Notwithstanding a testimony or two, it was not accepted at it&#39;s time as the only authority in town (besides for the communities in Teiman).<br /><br />2. The SA does not rule like the Rambam on tons of things that have nothing to do with mysticism. <br /><br />In general, this article is written with a total lack of knowledge into Jewish history.nochum shmaryohu zajachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16329003767166412682noreply@blogger.com